An Uncrossable Rubicon: Liszt's Sardanapalo Revisited
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Journal of the Royal Musical Association, 2018 Vol. 143, No. 2, 361–432, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02690403.2018.1507120 An Uncrossable Rubicon: Liszt’s Sardanapalo Revisited DAVID TRIPPETT Liszt and opera Liszt’s brief career as an operatic composer is rarely taken seriously today. Despite a battery of operatic transcriptions and a storied variation set on Bellini’s ‘Suoni la tromba’ (I puritani), his only completed opera, Don Sanche (1825), is typically classed as an unsuccessful juvenile work of dubious authorship.1 All other planned operas of the 1840s and 1850s remained the embryos of ambition, including Richard of Palestine (Walter Scott), Le corsaire (Byron/Dumas), Consuelo (George Sand), Jankó (Karl Beck), Spartacus (Oscar Wolf), Marguerite (Goethe),2 Divina commedia (Dante/Autran), Email: [email protected] While preparing this article I have accrued a number of debts. I am grateful to my collaborators Francesca Vella, David Rosen and Marco Beghelli; to Dana Gooley and Roger Parker, both of whom ofered helpful thoughts on earlier versions of this article; to the readers for and editors of this journal; and to the many who made insightful comments following talks I gave on this topic at the universities of Oxford, Manchester, Nottingham and Lviv, as well as at conferences in Bern (Tosc@Bern) and Huddersield (Twentieth Biennial International Conference on Nineteenth-Century Music). Naturally, any infelicities of expression or idea that remain are my own. I also record my thanks to the European Research Council and the Leverhulme Trust, whose funding (ERC Starting Grant DTHPS ‘Sound and Materialism in the Nineteenth Century’ and a Philip Leverhulme Prize respectively) made this work possible. 1 Don Sanche premièred on 17 October 1825 at the grandest of houses, the Paris Opéra, but closed after only four performances. he one surviving manuscript is in the hand of Liszt’s Italian composition teacher, Ferdinand Paër, which has led to claims that it was signiicantly indebted to Paër at a time when Liszt – aged 13–14 – was encouraged by his father self-consciously to cultivate the Geniegedanke attendant on Mozart’s childhood. See Émile Haraszti, ‘Liszt à Paris’, La revue musicale, 17/165 (April 1936), 253, and Allan Keiler, ‘Liszt as Romantic Hero: Imposturing the False Self’, Journal of the American Liszt Society, 67 (2016), 72–84 (p. 80). he counterargument – that Liszt’s composition was largely original – is made by Alan Walker, Franz Liszt, 3 vols. (London: Faber, 1983–96), i: he Virtuoso Years, 1811–1847, 114–16, and Paul Merrick, ‘Original or Doubtful? Liszt’s Use of Key in Support of his Authorship of Don Sanche?’, Studia musicologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 34 (1992), 427–34. No manuscript survives in Liszt’s hand. 2 On Marguerite, see Eric Frederick Jensen, ‘Liszt, Nerval, and Faust’, Nineteenth-Century Music, 6 (1982–3), 151–8, and Dorothea Redepenning, Franz Liszt: Faust-Symphonie (Munich: Wilhelm Fink, 1988). © 2018 he Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. his is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way. 362 DAVID TRIPPETT Jeanne d’Arc (Friedrich Halm) and Sardanapalo (Byron).3 his scattergun approach to great literary topics indicates the breadth of Liszt’s ambition, but also underscores the extent to which his desire to conjoin literature and music – the premiss of symphonic poetry – may have irst been kindled within the aesthetic potential of opera.4 Like Beethoven’s aborted opera Macbeth or Mendelssohn’s Lorelei, Liszt’s endeavours have garnered scholarly interest principally for reasons of curiosity and melancholy. Why were they abandoned? What have we lost? he situation has lent Liszt’s foray into Franco-Italian opera a split status: either a curious missed opportunity or a puzzling, apparently false step by an aspiring composer soon to ind irmer ground in the progressive agenda of instrumental programme music. his narrative has arguably been in place ever since Franz Brendel’s inluential Geschichte der Musik (1852) rendered a stultifying verdict on the potentiality of Italian opera: his nonsense in Italian opera: where we always encounter the same approach to the most diverse situations; where we always have before us the same stereotypical form in individual pieces, this endless cadencing on innumerable fermatas, the accompaniment of each number with trumpet, timpani and janissary music, etc. In a word: this style, this vacuous casualness is mentioned here only in order to justify the verdict that Italian musical art of the present has played itself out, and now inds itself at the lowest ebb of decay.5 As with so many historical narratives, this soon ossiied into a hermeneutic – in this case one that disenfranchises the operatic. Liszt’s sustained lirtation with opera is enmeshed therein and its re-examination in the light of Sardanapalo ofers us an 3 Liszt consistently refers to the opera in his French correspondence as Sardanapale, using the Italian form Sardanapalo only once within an Italian remark to Marie d’Agoult (14 April 1846; see below, n. 89). While scholars hitherto have referred to the opera by Liszt’s French form, it is an Italian opera, and we must presume that the inal title would have been Sardanapalo. his is the title used for the forthcoming critical edition, and I propose that we now use it to refer to Liszt’s opera. 4 Liszt’s work on the various opera topics was coeval with his very irst sketch for Tasso: Lamento e trionfo (1841) and his later compositional work on that overture (1847–8), which became part of his earliest symphonic poem. However, it would take two years before this was orchestrated by August Conradi and performed at the Goethe festival in Weimar (28 August 1849). he dating here is taken from the list of works compiled by Rena Mueller and Mária Eckhardt for the article on Liszt in Grove Music Online, Oxford Music Online, <http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com> (accessed 10 July 2018). I am grateful to Rena Mueller for providing contextual details here. 5 ‘Dieser Unsinn in der italienischen Oper, dass uns in den verschiedensten Situationen immer dieselbe Behandlung der Singstimme begegnet, dass wir immer in den einzelnen Musikstücken dieselbe stereotype Form vor uns haben, diese endlose Cadenzirung unzähliger Fermaten, die Begleitung jeder Nummer durch Trompeten- Pauken- und Janitscharenmusik u.s.w., mit einem Worte: diese Manier, dieser geistlose Schlendrian sei nur erwähnt, um dass Urtheil zu motiviren, dass die Tonkunst Italiens gegenwärtig sich ausgelebt hat, und auf der untersten Stufe des Verfalls sich beindet.’ Franz Brendel, Geschichte der Musik (1852), 3rd edn (Leipzig: Heinrich Matthes, 1860), 447. Translations throughout this article are my own unless otherwise stated. AN UNCROSSABLE RUBICON 363 opportunity to ‘wrest this tradition anew from the conformism which is on the point of overwhelming it’.6 he case of Sardanapalo is unique in that it is the only planned opera for which Liszt wrote any signiicant music. He devotes 115 pages to it at the start of the music book N4,7 and among his Weimar papers there survives an accompanying 36-page French prose scenario in three acts, long thought to be the basis of the opera’s libretto but subsequently shown to be a scenario Liszt solicited, but ultimately rejected, from Félicien Malleille.8 To be sure, the music notation of N4 has been known to Liszt scholars for more than a century, but it has been largely ignored on account of its seeming illegibility and incompleteness, and the assumed futility of piecing it all together: few returns for such time-consuming troubles.9 (Against this pattern of scholarly neglect, philological sleuthing has occasionally born fruit. Comparable editorial work on other nineteenth-century operas – Verdi’s Gustavo III and Stifelio, Rossini’s Il viaggio a Reims, Donizetti’s L’ange de Nisida and (at Mahler’s hands) Weber’s Die drei Pintos – is worth mentioning, if only for its scarcity.10) he irst printed comment on Sardanapalo set the tone: in 1911, Ida Marie Lipsius (writing under the pseudonym La Mara) remarked that Liszt’s work amounted 6 Walter Benjamin, ‘heses on the Philosophy of History’, Illuminations, trans. Harry Zohn (New York: Schocken, 1968), 253–64 (p. 255). 7 N4 is one of Liszt’s nine ‘sketch’ books, labelled N1–9, in the Goethe- und Schiller-Archiv, Weimar (hereafter GSA), where it is catalogued as GSA 60/N4. In its original state it constitutes a bound volume of blank, ten-stave pages rather than a collection of fascicles later bound together. In its material layout (17.5cm high × 23cm wide × 1.5cm thick, bound in brown leather) it contains 206 pages, of which 115 are associated with Sardanapalo. Of the pages associated with Sardanapalo, 110 contain music, one is a title page, and four are blank. Liszt left the irst two pages blank; in 1910, the musicologist Aloys Obrist turned the irst page into a title page by writing in pencil ‘Liszts Oper Sardanapal / Grösses Brüchstück’. 8 GSA, 59/156. hat this scenario, catalogued at GSA as ‘Rotondi? oder Fürstin Belgiojoso?’, was actually by Malleille was irst suggested by Kenneth Hamilton. he present article conirms this through Liszt’s newly available correspondence. See Hamilton, ‘Not with a Bang but a Whimper: he Death of Liszt’s Sardanapale’, Cambridge Opera Journal, 8 (1996), 45–58. 9 he only scholars to have engaged with the opera are Kenneth Hamilton (‘Not with a Bang’ and ‘Wagner and Liszt: Elective Ainities’, Wagner and his World, ed.